| Water Body Name: | Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve |
| Water Body ID: | CAE8011100019991012162811 |
| Water Body Type: | Estuary |
DECISION ID |
97220 |
Region 8 |
Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve |
||
| Pollutant: | Arsenic |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the 15 samples exceed the CRITERIA. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the 15 samples exceed the CRITERIA and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to SECTION 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 81265 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Arsenic | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 15 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the fifteen samples exceeded the water quality objective for arsenic. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Waterbodies in Region 8 and Region 9, 2006-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The concentrations of toxic pollutants in the water column, sediments or biota shall not adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The California Toxics Rule (CTR) lists criterion continuous concentrations (4-day average) to protect aquatic life in saltwater for arsenic of 36 ug/L. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from station BBOLR which is approximately located at the Observation Pier in Bolsa Bay, part of the Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected on 9/20/06, 2/11/07, 2/13/07, 2/15/07, 6/28/07, 10/4/07, 12/7/07, 12/9/07, 12/11/07, 2/22/08, 2/24/08, 2/26/08, 6/25/08, 10/9/08, and 6/25/09. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance with the signed and certified, Quality Assurance Management Plan for the Orange County Stormwater Program. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
97276 |
Region 8 |
Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve |
||
| Pollutant: | Cadmium |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the 15 samples exceed the CRITERIA. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the 15 samples exceed the CRITERIA and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to SECTION 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 81266 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Cadmium | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 15 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the fifteen samples exceeded the water quality objective for cadmium. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Waterbodies in Region 8 and Region 9, 2006-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The concentrations of toxic pollutants in the water column, sediments or biota shall not adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The California Toxics Rule (CTR) lists criterion continuous concentrations (4-day average) to protect aquatic life in saltwater for cadmium of 9.3 ug/L. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from station BBOLR which is approximately located at the Observation Pier in Bolsa Bay, part of the Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected on 9/20/06, 2/11/07, 2/13/07, 2/15/07, 6/28/07, 10/4/07, 12/7/07, 12/9/07, 12/11/07, 2/22/08, 2/24/08, 2/26/08, 6/25/08, 10/9/08, and 6/25/09. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance with the signed and certified, Quality Assurance Management Plan for the Orange County Stormwater Program. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
97277 |
Region 8 |
Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve |
||
| Pollutant: | Chlorpyrifos |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the 12 samples exceed the CRITERIA. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the 12 samples exceed the CRITERIA and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to SECTION 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 81267 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Chlorpyrifos | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total Dissolved | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 15 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of twelve samples exceed the Criteria Continuous Concentration for Chlorpyrifos of 9 ng/L. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Waterbodies in Region 8 and Region 9, 2006-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Marine communities, including vertebrate, invertebrate, and plant species, shall not be degraded. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | California Ocean Plan Water Quality Control Plan Ocean Waters of California 2009 | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The Criteria Continuous Concentration for chlorpyrifos in saltwater is 9 ng/L. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Water quality criteria for diazinon and chlorpyrifos. Administrative Report 00-3. Rancho Cordova, CA: Pesticide Investigations Unit, Office of Spills and Response. CA Department of Fish and Game | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected at site BBOLR. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected 2006 to 2009. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Data were submitted with the County of Orange Stormwater Program Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) dated January 2010. The Regional Water Board has determined that equivalent QA/QC documentation exists within the Water Quality Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Orange County MS4 permit and appendix C-11- X of the 2008-09 monitoring report. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | Quality Assurance Project Plan for the Orange County Stormwater Program. | ||||
DECISION ID |
97278 |
Region 8 |
Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve |
||
| Pollutant: | Copper |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. One of the 15 samples exceed the CRITERIA. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. One of the 15 samples exceed the CRITERIA and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to SECTION 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 81268 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Copper | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 15 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | One of the fifteen samples exceeded the water quality objective for copper. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Waterbodies in Region 8 and Region 9, 2006-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The concentrations of toxic pollutants in the water column, sediments or biota shall not adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The California Toxics Rule (CTR) lists criterion continuous concentrations (4-day average) to protect aquatic life in saltwater for copper of 3.1 ug/L. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from station BBOLR which is approximately located at the Observation Pier in Bolsa Bay, part of the Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected on 9/20/06, 2/11/07, 2/13/07, 2/15/07, 6/28/07, 10/4/07, 12/7/07, 12/9/07, 12/11/07, 2/22/08, 2/24/08, 2/26/08, 6/25/08, 10/9/08, and 6/25/09. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance with the signed and certified, Quality Assurance Management Plan for the Orange County Stormwater Program. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96941 |
Region 8 |
Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve |
||
| Pollutant: | Diazinon |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the 15 samples exceed the CRITERIA. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the 15 samples exceed the CRITERIA and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to SECTION 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 81269 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Diazinon | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total Dissolved | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 15 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the fifteen samples exceeded the Criteria Continuous Concentration for diazinon of 820 ng/L. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Waterbodies in Region 8 and Region 9, 2006-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Marine communities, including vertebrate, invertebrate, and plant species, shall not be degraded. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | California Ocean Plan Water Quality Control Plan Ocean Waters of California 2009 | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The Criteria Continuous Concentration for diazinon in saltwater is 820 ng/L. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Aquatic Life Ambient Water Quality Criteria for Diazinon | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected at site BBOLR. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | amples were collected 2006 to 2009. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Data were submitted with the County of Orange Stormwater Program Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) dated January 2010. However, data were collected prior to the development of this QAMP, therefore the quality of these data are unknown. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
94903 |
Region 8 |
Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve |
||
| Pollutant: | Indicator Bacteria |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.2 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
Nine (9) lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero (0) of 14 samples exceed the Enterococcus Geomean Objective. Four (4) of 36 samples exceed the Enterococcus Single Sample Objective. Zero (0) of 14 samples exceed the Fecal Coliform Geomean Objective. Three (3) of 36 samples exceed the Fecal Coliform Single Sample Objective. Zero (0) of 13 samples exceed the Total Coliform Geomean Objective. One (1) of 35 samples exceed the Total Coliform Single Sample Objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero (0) of the 14 samples exceed the Enterococcus Geomean Objective, Zero (0) of the 14 samples exceed the Fecal Coliform Geomean Objective, Zero (0) of the 13 samples exceed the Total Coliform Geomean, and this does not exceed the frequency listed in table 3.2 4. Four (4) of the 36 samples exceed the Enterococcus Single Sample Objective, Three (3) of the 36 samples exceed the Fecal Coliform Single Sample Objective, One (1) of the 35 samples exceed the Total Coliform Single Sample, and this does not exceed the frequency listed in table 3.2 5. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are not being exceeded. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 81275 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Fecal Coliform | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 14 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Not Specified | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Zero of the 14 geomeans exceeded the objective. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Region 8 Beach Watch. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The standard for fecal coliform states that the coliform density shall not exceed 400 per 100 mL. Water Quality Control Plan for Ocean Waters 2009. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | California Ocean Plan Water Quality Control Plan Ocean Waters of California 2009 | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected at BOLSA CHICA. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected approximately twice a month from January 2009 to October 2010. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | The samples were collected for the beach watch program. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 81293 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Total Coliform | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 11 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Not Specified | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | One of the eleven samples exceeded the total coliform objective. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Waterbodies in Region 8 and Region 9, 2006-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The concentrations of toxic pollutants in the water column, sediments or biota shall not adversely affect beneficial uses. Santa Ana Region basin Plan. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The single sample total coliform concentration shall not exceed more than 10000/100ml. Guidance for Fresh Water Beaches (CDPH 2011). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Draft Guidance for Fresh Water Beaches. Last Update: May 8, 2006. Initial Draft: November 1997. California Department of Public Health. | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected from Bolsa Bay Observation Pier. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected from 2006 to 2009. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | The samples were collected and analyzed under the Quality Assurance Management Plan for The Orange County Stormwater Program. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 81292 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Total Coliform | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 24 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PATHOGEN MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed BeachWatch data for Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 0 of 24 samples exceed the criterion for Coliform, Total. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Region 8 Beach Watch. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | California Ocean Plan (2009) single sample maximum states that total coliform density shall not exceed 10,000 per 100 mL | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | California Ocean Plan Water Quality Control Plan Ocean Waters of California 2009 | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve was collected at 1 monitoring site [ BOLSA CHICA] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/14/2009-10/28/2009. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The samples were collected for the Beach Watch program. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 81294 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Total Coliform | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 13 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Not Specified | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Zero of the 13 geomeans exceeded the objective. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Region 8 Beach Watch. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The standard for total coliform states that the coliform density shall not exceed 1000 per 100 mL. Water Quality Control Plan for Ocean Waters 2009. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | California Ocean Plan Water Quality Control Plan Ocean Waters of California 2009 | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected at BOLSA CHICA. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected approximately twice a month from January 2009 to October 2010. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | The samples were collected for the beach watch program. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 81272 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Enterococcus | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 14 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Not Specified | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Zero of the 14 geomeans exceeded the objective. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Region 8 Beach Watch. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The standard for enterococcus states that the density shall not exceed 35 per 100 mL. Water Quality Control Plan for Ocean Waters 2009. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | California Ocean Plan Water Quality Control Plan Ocean Waters of California 2009 | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected at BOLSA CHICA. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected approximately twice a month from January 2009 to October 2010. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | The samples were collected for the beach watch program. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 81270 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Enterococcus | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 25 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 2 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PATHOGEN MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed BeachWatch data for Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 2 of 25 samples exceed the criterion for Enterococci. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Region 8 Beach Watch. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | California Ocean Plan (SWRCB 2009) single sample maximum states that enterococcus density shall not exceed 104 per 100 mL. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | California Ocean Plan Water Quality Control Plan Ocean Waters of California 2009 | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve was collected at 1 monitoring site [ BOLSA CHICA] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/14/2009-10/28/2009. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The samples were collected for the Beach Watch program. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 81271 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Enterococcus | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 11 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 2 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Not Specified | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Two of the eleven samples exceeded the enterococcus objective. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Waterbodies in Region 8 and Region 9, 2006-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The concentrations of toxic pollutants in the water column, sediments or biota shall not adversely affect beneficial uses. Santa Ana Region basin Plan. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The single sample enterococcus concentration shall not exceed more than 61/100ml. Guidance for Fresh Water Beaches (CDPH 2011). | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Draft Guidance for Fresh Water Beaches. Last Update: May 8, 2006. Initial Draft: November 1997. California Department of Public Health. | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected from Bolsa Bay Observation Pier. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected from 2006 to 2009. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | The samples were collected and analyzed under the Quality Assurance Management Plan for The Orange County Stormwater Program. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 81274 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Fecal Coliform | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 11 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 2 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Not Specified | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Two of the eleven samples exceeded the fecal colifrom objective. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Waterbodies in Region 8 and Region 9, 2006-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The single sample fecal coliform concentration shall not exceed more than 400/100ml. Santa Ana Region Basin Plan. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected from Bolsa Bay Observation Pier. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected from 2006 to 2009. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | The samples were collected and analyzed under the Quality Assurance Management Plan for The Orange County Stormwater Program. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 81273 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Fecal Coliform | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Water Contact Recreation | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 25 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 1 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PATHOGEN MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Water Board staff assessed BeachWatch data for Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve to determine beneficial use support and results are as follows: 1 of 25 samples exceed the criterion for Coliform, Fecal. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Region 8 Beach Watch. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | California Ocean Plan (SWRCB 2009) single sample maximum states that fecal coliform density shall not exceed 400 per 100ml | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | California Ocean Plan Water Quality Control Plan Ocean Waters of California 2009 | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Data for this line of evidence for Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve was collected at 1 monitoring site [ BOLSA CHICA] | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Data was collected over the time period 1/14/2009-10/28/2009. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Staff is not aware of any special conditions that might affect interpretation of the data. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | The samples were collected for the Beach Watch program. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
96942 |
Region 8 |
Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve |
||
| Pollutant: | Lead |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the 15 samples exceed the CRITERIA. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the 15 samples exceed the CRITERIA and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to SECTION 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 81278 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Lead | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 15 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the fifteen samples exceeded the water quality objective for lead. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Waterbodies in Region 8 and Region 9, 2006-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The concentrations of toxic pollutants in the water column, sediments or biota shall not adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The California Toxics Rule (CTR) lists criterion continuous concentrations (4-day average) to protect aquatic life in saltwater for lead of 8.2 ug/L. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from station BBOLR which is approximately located at the Observation Pier in Bolsa Bay, part of the Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected on 9/20/06, 2/11/07, 2/13/07, 2/15/07, 6/28/07, 10/4/07, 12/7/07, 12/9/07, 12/11/07, 2/22/08, 2/24/08, 2/26/08, 6/25/08, 10/9/08, and 6/25/09. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance with the signed and certified, Quality Assurance Management Plan for the Orange County Stormwater Program. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
97289 |
Region 8 |
Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve |
||
| Pollutant: | Malathion |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the 15 samples exceed the CRITERIA. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the 15 samples exceed the CRITERIA and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to SECTION 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 81279 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Malathion | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Total Dissolved | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 15 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the fifteen samples exceeded the maximum concentration for Malathion of 100 ng/L. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Waterbodies in Region 8 and Region 9, 2006-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | Marine communities, including vertebrate, invertebrate, and plant species, shall not be degraded. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | California Ocean Plan Water Quality Control Plan Ocean Waters of California 2009 | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The maximum (Instantaneous) concentration for Malathion in saltwater is 100 ng/L. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Quality Criteria for Water. USEPA Office of Water and Hazardous Materials. Washington, D.C | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected at site BBOLR. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected 2006 to 2009. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Data were submitted with the County of Orange Stormwater Program Quality Assurance Management Plan (QAMP) dated January 2010. However, data were collected prior to the development of this QAMP, therefore the quality of these data are unknown. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
97290 |
Region 8 |
Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve |
||
| Pollutant: | Mercury |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the 2 samples exceed the CRITERIA. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the 2 samples exceed the CRITERIA and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to SECTION 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 81280 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Mercury | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 2 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the two samples analyzed for mercury exceeded the water quality objective. The reporting limit for one of the samples was greater than the water quality objective therefore could not be used in the assessment. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Waterbodies in Region 8 and Region 9, 2006-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The concentrations of toxic pollutants in the water column, sediments or biota shall not adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | National Recommended Water Quality Criteria Continuous Concentrations (4-day average concentrations) for saltwater aquatic organisms exposure to elemental mercury is 0.94 ug/L. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | National Recommended Water Quality Criteria. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Water. Office of Science and Technology | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from station BBOLR which is approximately located at the Observation Pier in Bolsa Bay, part of the Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected on 6/25/08, 10/9/08, and 6/25/09. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance with the signed and certified, Quality Assurance Management Plan for the Orange County Stormwater Program. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
97348 |
Region 8 |
Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve |
||
| Pollutant: | Nickel |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the 15 samples exceed the CRITERIA. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the 15 samples exceed the CRITERIA and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to SECTION 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 81281 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Nickel | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 15 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the fifteen samples exceeded the water quality objective for nickel. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Waterbodies in Region 8 and Region 9, 2006-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The concentrations of toxic pollutants in the water column, sediments or biota shall not adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The California Toxics Rule (CTR) lists criterion continuous concentrations (4-day average) to protect aquatic life in saltwater for nickel at 8 ug/L. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from station BBOLR which is approximately located at the Observation Pier in Bolsa Bay, part of the Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected on 9/20/06, 2/11/07, 2/13/07, 2/15/07, 6/28/07, 10/4/07, 12/7/07, 12/9/07, 12/11/07, 2/22/08, 2/24/08, 2/26/08, 6/25/08, 10/9/08, and 6/25/09. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance with the signed and certified, Quality Assurance Management Plan for the Orange County Stormwater Program. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
89125 |
Region 8 |
Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve |
||
| Pollutant: | Oxygen, Dissolved |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section three (3) of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2, a single line of evidence is necessary to assess the listing status.
One (1) line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero (0) of one (1) sample exceed the Objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero (0) of one (1) sample exceeded the Objective and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 26 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.2. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 81282 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Oxygen, Dissolved | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Warm Freshwater Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Numeric data generated from 1 sample of Dissolved Oxygen concentrations had no exceedences. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for bacteria in various waterbodies, Feb. 2005-May 2007 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The dissolved oxygen content of all surface waters designated as "Warm Freshwater Habitat" must be greater than 5.0 mg/L. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from the Buck Gully - fresh water station. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | One sample was collected in May 2007. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | NPDES quality assurance. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
97349 |
Region 8 |
Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve |
||
| Pollutant: | Selenium |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the 15 samples exceed the CRITERIA. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the 15 samples exceed the CRITERIA and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to SECTION 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 81284 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Selenium | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 15 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the fifteen samples exceeded the water quality objective for selenium. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Waterbodies in Region 8 and Region 9, 2006-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The concentrations of toxic pollutants in the water column, sediments or biota shall not adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The California Toxics Rule (CTR) lists criterion continuous concentrations (4-day average) to protect aquatic life in saltwater for selenium at 71 ug/L. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from station BBOLR which is approximately located at the Observation Pier in Bolsa Bay, part of the Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected on 9/20/06, 2/11/07, 2/13/07, 2/15/07, 6/28/07, 10/4/07, 12/7/07, 12/9/07, 12/11/07, 2/22/08, 2/24/08, 2/26/08, 6/25/08, 10/9/08, and 6/25/09. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance with the signed and certified, Quality Assurance Management Plan for the Orange County Stormwater Program. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
97403 |
Region 8 |
Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve |
||
| Pollutant: | Silver |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the 15 samples exceed the CRITERIA. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the 15 samples exceed the CRITERIA and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to SECTION 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 81291 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Silver | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 15 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the fifteen samples exceeded the water quality objective for silver. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Waterbodies in Region 8 and Region 9, 2006-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The concentrations of toxic pollutants in the water column, sediments or biota shall not adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The California Toxics Rule (CTR) lists criterion maximum concentrations (1-hour average) for silver to protect aquatic life in saltwater as 1.9 ug/L. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from station BBOLR which is approximately located at the Observation Pier in Bolsa Bay, part of the Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected on 9/20/06, 2/11/07, 2/13/07, 2/15/07, 6/28/07, 10/4/07, 12/7/07, 12/9/07, 12/11/07, 2/22/08, 2/24/08, 2/26/08, 6/25/08, 10/9/08, and 6/25/09. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | Samples were collected on 9/20/06, 2/11/07, 2/13/07, 2/15/07, 6/28/07, 10/4/07, 12/7/07, 12/9/07, 12/11/07, 2/22/08, 2/24/08, 2/26/08, 6/25/08, 10/9/08, and 6/25/09. | ||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance with the signed and certified, Quality Assurance Management Plan for the Orange County Stormwater Program. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
97404 |
Region 8 |
Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve |
||
| Pollutant: | Zinc |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.1 a single line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status.
One line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero of the 15 samples exceed the CRITERIA. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero of the 15 samples exceed the CRITERIA and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 16 samples is needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.1. 4. Pursuant to SECTION 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 81304 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Zinc | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 15 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | Fixed station physical/chemical (conventional plus toxic pollutants) | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | None of the fifteen samples exceeded the water quality objective for zinc. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Waterbodies in Region 8 and Region 9, 2006-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The concentrations of toxic pollutants in the water column, sediments or biota shall not adversely affect beneficial uses. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | The California Toxics Rule (CTR) lists criterion continuous concentrations (4-day average) to protect aquatic life in saltwater for zinc at 81 ug/L. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Code of Federal Regulations 40 part 131.38 Establishment of numeric criteria for priority toxic pollutants for the State of California. 7/1/2011 Edition | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from station BBOLR which is approximately located at the Observation Pier in Bolsa Bay, part of the Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | Samples were collected on 9/20/06, 2/11/07, 2/13/07, 2/15/07, 6/28/07, 10/4/07, 12/7/07, 12/9/07, 12/11/07, 2/22/08, 2/24/08, 2/26/08, 6/25/08, 10/9/08, and 6/25/09. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | Samples were collected and analyzed in accordance with the signed and certified, Quality Assurance Management Plan for the Orange County Stormwater Program. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
88801 |
Region 8 |
Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve |
||
| Pollutant: | pH |
| Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | Do Not List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section three (3) of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.2, a single line of evidence is necessary to assess the listing status.
One (1) line of evidence is available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Zero (0) of one (1) sample exceeds the Objective. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification against placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy. 2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy. 3. Zero (0) of one (1) sample exceeded the Objective and this sample size is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. A minimum of 26 samples are needed to determine if a beneficial use is fully supported using table 3.2. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should not be placed on the section 303(d) list. The readily available data and information is insufficient to determine, with the power and confidence of the Listing Policy, the applicable beneficial use support rating. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 81283 | ||||
| Pollutant: | pH | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Pollutant-Water | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | Dissolved | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Estuarine Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 1 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 0 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL MONITORING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Numeric data generated from 1 sample of pH data had no exceedences. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for bacteria in various waterbodies, Feb. 2005-May 2007 | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The pH of bay or estuary waters shall not be raised above 8.6 or depressed below 7.0 as a result of controllable water quality factors... | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | |||||
| Guideline Reference: | |||||
| Spatial Representation: | Samples were collected from the Bolsa Chica Walkbridge station. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | One sample was collected on 5/5/2007. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | NPDES quality assurance. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
DECISION ID |
94747 |
Region 8 |
Bolsa Chica Ecological Reserve |
||
| Pollutant: | Toxicity |
| Final Listing Decision: | List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list) |
| Last Listing Cycle's Final Listing Decision: | List on 303(d) list (TMDL required list)(2016) |
| Revision Status | Original |
| Sources: | A Source Unknown |
| Expected TMDL Completion Date: | 2027 |
| Impairment from Pollutant or Pollution: | Pollutant |
| Regional Board Conclusion: | This pollutant is being considered for placement on the CWA section 303(d) List under section 3.6 of the Listing Policy. Under section 3.6 at least one line of evidence is necessary to assess listing status for toxicity, and waters may be placed on the CWA section 303(d) List for toxicity alone. Two lines of evidence are available in the administrative record to assess this pollutant. Two of the seven samples exhibited sediment toxicity. Four of the twelve samples exhibited water toxicity. Based on the readily available data and information, the weight of evidence indicates that there is sufficient justification in favor of placing this water segment-pollutant combination on the CWA section 303(d) List. This conclusion is based on the staff findings that: 1. The data used satisfies the data quality requirements of section 6.1.4 of the Policy.2. The data used satisfies the data quantity requirements of section 6.1.5 of the Policy.3. Two of the seven samples exhibited sediment toxicity and this exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. Four of the twelve samples exhibited water toxicity and this exceeds the allowable frequency listed in Table 3.1 of the Listing Policy. 4. Pursuant to section 3.11 of the Listing Policy, no additional data and information are available indicating that standards are not met. |
| Regional Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of the available data and information, RWQCB staff concludes that the water body-pollutant combination should be placed on the section 303(d) list because applicable water quality standards are exceeded and a pollutant contributes to or causes the problem. |
| State Board Review of Regional Board Conclusion and Recommendation: | |
| State Board Decision Recommendation: | After review of this Regional Board decision, SWRCB staff recommend the decision be approved by the State Board. |
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 81295 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Toxicity | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Toxicity | ||||
| Matrix: | Water | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Marine Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 12 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 4 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | TOXICITY TESTING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Twelve samples were collected to evaluate water toxicity. Four of the 12 samples exhibited significant toxicity. The toxicity tests that exhibited significant toxicity included Mysid Survival and biomass, Purple Urchin development. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Waterbodies in Region 8 and Region 9, 2006-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The concentrations of toxic substances in the water column, sediments or biota shall not adversely affect beneficial uses. Region 8 Basin Plan. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | Toxicity is defined as a statistically significant effect in the sample exposure compared to the control using EPA-recommended hypothesis testing. The t-test is used to determine if there is a statistically significant decrease in organism response in the sample as compared to the control. Exceedances are counted with the significant effect code SL. SL is defined as the result being significant compared to the negative control based on a statistical test, less than stated the alpha level, AND less than the evaluation threshold. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Short-term Methods for Estimating the Chronic Toxicity of Effluents and Receiving Waters to West Coast Marine and Estuarine Organisms. EPA/600/R-95-136. | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at station BBOLR-Bolsa Bay. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected approximately quarterly from May 2006 to November 2009. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | The data collected under the Quality Assurance Management Plan for The Orange County Stormwater Program. The SWAMP measurement quality objectives were followed for toxicity data. The performance of toxicity bioassays and evaluation of reference toxicants were performed using USEPA and Standard Methods. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||
|
|||||
| LOE ID: | 81296 | ||||
| Pollutant: | Toxicity | ||||
| LOE Subgroup: | Toxicity | ||||
| Matrix: | Sediment | ||||
| Fraction: | None | ||||
| Beneficial Use: | Marine Habitat | ||||
| Number of Samples: | 7 | ||||
| Number of Exceedances: | 2 | ||||
| Data and Information Type: | TOXICITY TESTING | ||||
| Data Used to Assess Water Quality: | Seven samples were collected to evaluate sediment toxicity. Two of the seven samples exhibited significant toxicity. The toxicity tests included survival of Eohaustorius. | ||||
| Data Reference: | Data for Various Waterbodies in Region 8 and Region 9, 2006-2009. | ||||
| SWAMP Data: | Non-SWAMP | ||||
| Water Quality Objective/Criterion: | The concentrations of toxic substances in the water column, sediments or biota shall not adversely affect beneficial uses.Region 8 Basin Plan. | ||||
| Objective/Criterion Reference: | Water Quality Control Plan, Santa Ana River Basin | ||||
| Evaluation Guideline: | Toxicity is defined as a statistically significant effect in the sample exposure compared to the control using EPA-recommended hypothesis testing. The t-test is used to determine if there is a statistically significant decrease in organism response in the sample as compared to the control. Exceedances are counted with the significant effect code SL. SL is defined as the result being significant compared to the negative control based on a statistical test, less than stated the alpha level, AND less than the evaluation threshold. | ||||
| Guideline Reference: | Methods for Assessing the Toxicity of Sediment-associated Contaminants with Estuarine and Marine Amphipods. June 1994. EPA 600/R-94/025 | ||||
| Spatial Representation: | The samples were collected at station BBOLR - Bolsa Bay. | ||||
| Temporal Representation: | The samples were collected from approximately twice a year from 2006 to 2009. | ||||
| Environmental Conditions: | |||||
| QAPP Information: | The data collected under the Quality Assurance Management Plan for The Orange County Stormwater Program. The SWAMP measurement quality objectives were followed for toxicity data. The performance of toxicity bioassays and evaluation of reference toxicants were performed using USEPA and Standard Methods. | ||||
| QAPP Information Reference(s): | |||||